Comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography and digital subtraction angiography in the evaluation of renal artery stenosis and detecting of accessory and polar arteries

Abstract

Objectives: Renal artery stenosis (RAS) is the most common cause of secondary hypertension. RAS may cause renal insufficiency, uncontrolled hypertension and is associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of contrast enhanced Flash 3D Renal Magnetic Resonance Angiography (MRA) in the depiction of the RAS also detecting of accessory and polar renal arteries with intraarterial digital subtraction angiography (DSA) still serving as the reference standard.

Methods: In this retrospective case-control study, we reviewed contrast enhanced Flash 3D Renal MRA and DSA of 71 patients who were suspected of having RAS and underwent DSA after MRA within 15 days. DSA was accepted as gold standart and the specificity, sensitivity and accuracy of MRA were determined.

Results: Overall sensitivity and specificity values of contrast enhanced Flash 3D Renal MRA in detecting stenosis were 96.1% and 76.3% respectively.

Conclusions: Contrast enhanced Flash 3D Renal MRA is a reliable noninvasive imaging modality in the diagnosis of RAS.

Keywords

• renal
• artery
• angiography
• stenosis
• polar

References

1. 1. Derkx FHM, Schalekamp MADH. Renal artery stenosis and hypertension. Lancet 1994;344:234-7.
2. 2. Rammer M, Kramar R, Eber B. [Atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2007;132:2458-62. [Article in German]
3. 3. Mailloux LU, Napolitano B, Bellucci AG ve ark. Renal vascular disease causing end-stage renal disease, incidence, clinical correlates and outcomes: a 20-year clinical experience. Am J Kidney Dis 1994;24:622-9.
4. 4. O’Neil EA, Hansen KJ, Canzanello VJ, Pennell TC, Dean RH. Prevalence of ischaemic nephropathy in patients with renal insufficiency. Am Surg 1992;58:485-90.
5. 5. Hunt JC, Sheps SG, Harrison EG Jr, Strong CG, Bernatz PE. Renal and renovascular hypertension. A reasoned approach to diagnosis and management. Arch Intern Med 1974;133:988-99.
6. 6. National High Blood Pressure Education Program Working Group. 1995 update of the working group reports on chronic renal failure and renovascular hypertension. Arch Intern Med 1996;156:1938-47.
7. 7. Safian RD, Textor SC. Renal artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 2001;344:431-42.
8. 8. Tegtmeyer CJ, Kellum CD, Ayers C. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of renal artery: results and long-term follow-up. Radiology 1984;153:77-84.

9. 9. Eldrup-Jorgensen J, Haevey HR, Samson LN, Amberson SM, Bredenberg CE. Should percutaneous transluminal renal artery angioplasty be applied to ostial artery atherosclerosis? J Vasc Surg 1995;21:909-15.
10. 10. Harden PN, MacLeod MJ, Rodger RSC, Baxter GM, Connell JM, Dominiczak AF, et al. Effect of renal-artery stenting on progression of renovascular failure. Lancet 1997;349:1133-6.
11. 11. Mitty HA, Shapiro RS, Parsons R, Silberzweig JE. Renovascular hypertension. Radiol Clin North Am 1996;34:1017-36.
12. 12. Völk M, Strotzer M, Lenhart M, Manke C, Nitz WR, JSeitz J, et al. Time-resolved contrast-enhanced MR angiography of renal artery stenosis: diagnostic accuracy and interobserver variability. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;174:1583-8.
13. 13. Soulez G, Pasowicz M, Benea G, Grazioli L, Niedmann JP, Konopka M, et al. Renal artery stenosis evaluation: diagnostic performance of gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MR anjiography--comparasion with DSA. Radiology 2008;247:273-85.
14. 14. Hessel SJ, Adams DF, Abrams HL. Complications of angiography. Radiology 1981;138;273-81.
15. 15. Algın O, Doğan N, Şentürk E, Topal NB. [The diagnostic value of Doppler ultrasonography and three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography for detecting renal artery stenosis]. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 2008;34:97-102. [Article in Turkish]
16. 16. Fananapazir G, Bashir MR, Corwin MT, Lamba R, Vu CT, Troppmann C. Comparison of ferumoxytol-enhanced MRA with conventional angiography for assessment of severity of transplant renal artery stenosis. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017;45:779-85.
17. 17. François CJ, Lum DP, Johnson KM, Landgraf BR, Bley TA, Reeder SB, et al. Renal arteries: isotopic, high-spatial-resolution, unhanced MR anjiogaphy with three-dimensional radial phase contrast. Radiology 2011;258:254-60.
18. 18. Khoo MMY, Deeab D, Geodroyc WMW, Duncan N, Taube D, Dick EA. Renal artery stenosis: comparative assesment by unenhanced renal artery mra versus conrtast-enhanced MRA. Eur Radiol 2011;21:1470-6.
19. 19. Guo X, Gong Y, Wu Z, Yan F, Ding X, Xu X. Renal artery assesment with non-enhanced MR angiography versus digital substraction angiography: comparison between 1.5 and 3.0 T. Eur Radiol 2020;30:1747-54.
20. 20. Riederer SJ, Stinson EG, Weavers PT. Technical aspects of contrast-enhanced MR Angiography: current status and new applications. Magn Reson Med Sci 2018;17:3-12.
21. 21. Lim RP, Shapiro M, Wang EY, Law M, Babb JS, Rueff LE, et al. 3D time-resolved MR angiography (MRA) of the carotid arteries with time-resolved imaging with stocahastic trajectories: comparison with 3D contrast-enhanced bolus-chase MRA and 3D time-of-flight MRA AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:1847-54.
22. 22. Wright KL, Lee GR, Ehses P, Griswold MA, Gulani V, Seiberlich N. Three-dimensional through-time radial GRAPPA for renal MR angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014;40:864-74.
23. 23. Shetty AN, Bis KG, Kirsch M, Weintraub J, Laub G. Contrast-enhanced breath-hold three-dimensional magnetic resonance angiography in the evaluation of renal arteries: optimization of technique and pitfalls. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;12:912-23.
24. 24. Fitoz S, Yağmurlu B, Erden A, Erden İ, Bilgiç S. [Three-dimensional contrast-enhanced MRA in renal artery stenosis: comparison with digital subtraction angiography]. Türk Tanısal ve Girişimsel Radyoloji 2002;8:527-32. [Article in Turkish]